Leonardo Boff: "Pope Francis is much more liberal than what is supposed."

Leonardo Boff is the famous former Franciscan priest who is one of the main names of the ideological movement known as "Liberation Theology." He was the mentor of the closest friend, greatest electoral supporter and most influential Cardinal in the new pontificate, the Brazilian Claudio Hummes, also a Franciscan. His most influential book, "Church: Charism and Power", was the object of a specific 1985 notification of the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith, which "was obliged to declare that the options of L. Boff analyzed here endanger the sound doctrine of the faith".Excerpts provided in Spanish by Periodista Digital and published today:

"Pope Francis is more liberal than what is supposed"
...
The Brazilian former priest Leonardo Boff, one of the most preeminent representatives of the so-called Liberation Theology, believes that Pope Francis will surprise many by heading a radical move in the church.

"He now is the pope and he can do whatever he wants. Many will be surprised with what Francis will do. In order to do this, a rupture with traditions will be needed, to leave behind the corrupt Vatican curia to give way to a universal church," Boff said in an interview published by German magazine Der Spiegel in its edition for the upcoming week.

...

Boff also says that, even though in many aspects - as those referring to contraceptives, celibacy, and homosexuality - Bergoglio followed a conservative line, as a cardinal, that was due solely to pressure from the Vatican, and maintains that there are elements that indicate that the new pope is much more liberal than that.

"A couple of months ago, for instance, he expressly approved that a homosexual couple adopt a child. He is in touch with priests who have been repudiated by the official church because they got married. And, most importantly, he did not let himself be separated from his conviction that we must be on the side of the poor," the former priest says.

[The original Der Spiegel interview is available for subscribers only here. We will try to provide a wider collection of excerpts when available.] [Tip: reader Pie]

79 comments:

Francis in Ma
said...

"Leonardo Boff: "Pope Francis is much more liberal than what is supposed.""

Not to us that have known about what this guy has stood for for years! I know that I sound like a broken record but Bergoglio is about the worst choice for pope we traditionalists could have got, except for Christoph Schonborn and a handful of other devout modernists and liberals. Lord help us!

Brazilian secular journalist Elio Gaspari, also famous here in Brazil for an important collection of books on the Brazilian Military Dictatorship (1964-1985), has read the new Pope's book "Sobre el cielo y la tierra" and his highly impressed, praising him as "not conservative at all".

For the secular journalist, the fact that the Cardinal is not traditonal is very positive.

Am I the only one to be utterly cheesed-off by the now hackneyed term, 'the poor' in relation to the new Pope?

I'm sorry but I'm poor, it's all relative of course. What really bugs me is that most of those using the term 'the poor' in reference to what Pope Francis has said are the intelligentia and are themselves probably quite financially well-off as a result of their questionable theories and writings or their appaling lack of leadership whilst holding office. Two names come to mind Boff and Mahoney (sounds like a relief for constipation!).

There is a lot of wickedness going on at the moment. As Passiontide begins I shall offer up my worries and concerns.

How can we be sure Boff telling the truth? Boff may just be saying these things to stir the pot. Is there any corroboration about the homosexual couple or the married priests that Boff is linking the Pope to?

Anthony: we report, you decide. I dare say that Boff knows Pope Bergoglio and his milieu much, much better than we do. Now, it will not take long for us to find out if his impressions will come true or not.

I am very concerned about the voice Rorate is giving to criticism towards the Holy Father. I really tried to remain silent, as I've been for the last 3 years in which I daily read your blog, with pleasure I dare say. However, I feel I should chime in with some thoughts, for those who might wish to read them:

- the Holy Father has the grace of state. Period. We are sinning against the Holy Spirit if we deny this truth of Faith.

- Jesus has granted us He would remains with the Church forever, and the Church would always surpass evil.

- Francis is creating an unseen boost of Faith, and speaks to the heart. The Pode is not afraid to talk about the Enemy and preach the Cross. Are this no signs he is no modernist? The modernists I know (Jesuits included, I'm afraid) deny the very existence of the Devil and preach a Christ striped of the Cross.

- are we interpreting Francis' words right? If the Pope says 'I want a Church that is poor', does he literally mean the Church should sell the estate?! I guess not! It is possible to live true poverty surrounded by the Church's faust: I believe the Pope will try this way.

- are you paying attention to details? The Pope has not abandoned the Benedictine arrangement of the altar! He has not dismissed Msgr. Marini, and probably won't. He has by his side Msgr. George. We can be assured the Pope is being given Benedict's advice through the Pope Emeritus' former "staff". Moreover: Francis has used a different mitre today, one that was used frequently by BXVI; and the Pope didn't ask for a different pastoral staff; he doesn't avoid people kissing his ring. Details, people! With time, if Marini stays, and (I admit it) as Francis' interest on liturgy is not that high, the Pope will allow others to guide him in those matters.

I don't know if you will delete my comment. I am in no way criticizing Rorate!! But would kindly ask for charity when talking - and writing - about the Holy Father. If any worries emerge, please offer prayers, mortification... Say the decades of the Rosary and offer them for the Holy Father. He much needs our spiritual company.

Didacus, from Portugal: you mean, in the comments? Because in posts we provide opinions of those who are critical but also, as this post shows, those who are great supporters of the new Pontiff. Our readers may reach their own conclusions. And their positions may vary, such as those in this thread, including yours. Our opinion is irrelevant, and we have never expressed it here. It is not our intention to influence opinions or events.

As for the comments, in the first two/three days they were left unmoderated, because we simply cannot manage 500, 600 comments in those days of great events. Now, you have no way of knowing how many we must leave out, and those who may seem "extreme" are very moderate compared with those we block.

@ Francis in Ma: You wrote, "Bergoglio is about the worst choice for pope we traditionalists could have got...."

I think the days of having the luxury of differentiating in terms of Traditionalists/ Conservatives etc may have ended. I would be inclined to write "Bergoglio may be just about the worst choice for pope we Catholics could have got...."

I'm going to put it on us - the traditional Catholics. Nothing is good enough for us. Pope Benedict was favored when he released the Motu Proprio. Soon after, we were whining and complaining (I know I was), about him never celebrating the Old Mass in public. We whined when he allowed certain things to go on in the Church, but rarely praised his efforts in bringing outsiders in.The bottom line: we were not worthy of Benedict's pontificate. It was a sign of God's mercy to place him there. We did not do our part well enough. We ARE NOT doing are part well enough. As a result, God is humbling the salt of the earth. What are WE going to do as a result? How are WE going to change as traditional Catholics? I don't mean in Faith and morals, but in living out the Faith. Are we going to initiate rants about Pope Francis? Fuel them? Not stop them? If we could so easily find ammunition to put Benedict down, then how easy will it be to put Pope Francis down? I love the Old Mass, and I love Peter too. We have no right to criticize Peter. Please don't cite Paul's admonishment of Peter as a refutation of this. Paul was The Apostle and bishop of the Church. Who are WE? Be charitable! Stop yourself and your friends from putting Peter down! It is because of US that we are where we are, not the liberals. Most of them have no idea what they are doing anyway. We are so well catechized, and we attend the Old Mass so reverently and so often. Therefore, when we go wrong, how much more does it hurt the Body of Christ?Let's be charitable!Rorate: I know that you are doing your best to remain balanced in your posts, posting the good and bad. But please, unless it is out of Pope Francis' mouth, please refrain from posting rumors, murmurs, speculation. This will hurt the Body of Christ. Also, if you read what St. Thomas Aquinas teaches about fraternal correction, you will see that the higher the person's office is, the more gentle and charitable you approach the correction. You cannot get higher than Peter, so please, approach it with utmost gentleness and charity.Lastly, to underline my point: it is due to our actions and/or omissions that we have Pope Francis at the helm, not the liberals. We need to change our arrogant ways. We need to do something different. That doesn't mean compromising the Faith in anyway, but in our spiritual lives and day-to-day lives. An Our Father, Hail Mary, Glory be for the Holy Father's intentions at the end of our Rosaries is not enough! Do we pray the Rosary everyday? I pray 5 decades everyday; I don't prayer the Rosary everyday (15 decades). Maybe we should? If we continue in the same manner, but expect a different result, then we are insane.WE want a traditionalist Pope? It starts with us!!! I could already imagine my arrogance go through the roof if the new pope were to be a Cardinal Burke, Ranjith. We need to change! You and I! Our words, thoughts, and deeds do not reflect what we say we believe.

I know for sure it is not your intention to provoke criticism towards the Holy Father. However, as you stated, there are hundreds os comments with "extremed" positions. I believe that, even if it is not your intention, post like this one or the previous (regarding Hummes) pass along a message that can be misinterpreted by those less informed. Nevertheless, I repeat: I don't blame Rorate; I just hoped yours posts, during these hard times for traditionalist, would not only present facts, but also conduct the best interpretation.

Forgive me for the metaphor (jurist speaking here!), we should read all the news and events with an interpretation principal that is "in favor Pontificii" (I hope I didn't fail my Latin, but feel free to correct me).

Didacus

PS - in my last comment I forgot to had that Boff, as others, will use the Holy Father as a shield for their purposes, and invent ways in which to twist Francis' words and actions in their favour. Beware.

"I just hoped yours posts, during these hard times for traditionalist, would not only present facts, but also conduct the best interpretation."

I am sorry, but we could never do that, we are not manipulative - this is what we criticize in many "religious correspondents". We present facts and declarations, our readers may reach their own conclusions. Now, we do suggest that those that are confused or sad seek the spiritual guidance of a good priest - this is not the place for such guidance either.

"He now is the pope and he can do whatever he wants". Sorry, Fr. Boff, a Pope's powers are not unlimited. The pope is not the head of the Church, as is too often heard, he is just the vicar of the Head - and as such he is supposed to submit to the Church's divine constitution. Unfortunately, it must be honestly recognized that Leonardo Boff's conception of a kind of "omnia quaecumque voluit fecit"-Pope originates from a biased conception of the papacy that is widespread in our "traditional" circles and has been so for the last 2 or 3 centuries.

If Pope Francis abrogates Summorum Pontificum, then I'll worry. Until then, I'm just going to continue living as a Catholic. The Church survived and flourished centuries before the Internet made it possible to follow the daily goings on in Rome. Pope Benedict XVI was probably the most trad friendly pope I'll see in my lifetime, but very little changed at the grassroots level where I am. In all of the local suburban parishes it was still "On Eagle's Wings" and "Gather us In" performed by the Caruso family folk band jamboree every Sunday of Benedict's pontificate.

Call me naive, but I've heard from several sources that Pope Francis prays fifteen decades of the rosary every day. Fifteen, not twenty. If that's true, no man who regularly prays the rosary can go astray, to say nothing of the additional grace of the office of pope. Hope, pray, and don't worry.

I am beginning to think that we did not, all of us, pray for Benedict enough. Thank he was frail is true, but perhaps if we had all prayed more, we would have seen him thrive.

I am concerned. I am also grateful, very, for this website, which allows for free discussion of all issues, while still loving and praying for our Pope.

NO POPE has taught heresy from the Chair of Peter. Some have been dead wrong on politics and other issues; some have lived less than moral lives. One was killed in bed, I think, with another man's wife.

The point is that the Church survived, but not without persecution and hard days.

I am older than most of you, remember Vatican II, when the nuns wheeled a television into the classroom for the opening. My diocese was one of the 12 experimental dioceses for the NO. I have lived with liturgical abuses since all changed in my teens.

I am sad and worried. I do not idolize men, popes included. God is my God. He has allowed this man to be elected for some reason. It is too early to know exactly why. Maybe for hardship...I own his my prayers and love in Christ. I do not have to like him. I have to love him.

And, I am poor, but only want real love and attention, not socialism or anything else.

Tom, whatever the future will be/bring, I can assure you, in all good faith, and with no specific colour of glasses, black or pink, that, objectively, that "diagonal shape" was used already a lot of times, over the last years, with our beloved MC Guido Marini fully cum Benedicto et sub Benedicto.

I do understand the anxiety of most of us (my humble self included), but sometimes we should give up for a moment "playing the aruspices" with whatever visible sign we can get from celebrations or whatever else involves the Pope.

The "Kremlinologist"-temptation is always at hand.. (and I admit, I'm the first who cannot resit it, of course! :)

I agree with Anthony. If Francis approved a gay couple adopting, then how explain that the media has not found it and declared it to the high heavens. It contradicts his statements to the contrary that were not a result of Vatican pressure. Why is Boff suddenly reliable?

Good point, Supertradmum. I think it's going to become increasingly important to reacquaint ourselves with the nature of the Neocath/Neocon faction as they go along with what seems to be the coming acceleration of the decomposition. To that end, I suggest that all read these articles:

Leonardo Boff is presomptuous because he counts the Holy Spirit as nothing.Many cardinals behaved very differently once they became popes.When one is elected pope, one is a new man under the Holy Spirit action.

What? I, you, the other readers here are to blame? It's not the liberals' fault?

I was born in 1963. I didn't call the damn Council. You didn't teach John Paul II in seminary. It wasn't New Catholics books Ratzinger read and fed on prior to ditching his clericals in the early 1960's. Ecumenism isn't my mum's fault. It wasn't my dad who came up with the Assisi gatherings. I didn't see Prof. Basto issuing any traitorous ARCIC documents. It wasn't Francis in Ma who came up with the Novus Ordo with his Protestant buddies. I don't think the SSPX came up with liberation theology. It wasn't Archbishop Lefebvre who came up with the infamous papier mache "Mass" in a Canadian hotel.

My daughter's cat may possibly be responsible for Paul Inwood's "Agnus Dei-A-Go-Go Mass in G Major for Combined electric guitars, strings and combine harvester engines", I do accept that.

Traditionalists have reason to be concerned. While the Pope cannot proclaim error in Faith & morals, he can endanger the Church in other ways. The Popes, their bishops, & clergy of the past must take some blame for the fact that Christianity is divided today. And there is precedent for papal criticism; St. Catherine of Sienna comes to mind.

Yet... I still do hope that Archbishop Major Shevchuk of Kyiv(..they know each other well enough..) will sooner than later try to explain His Holiness that a dignified Sacred Liturgy is (or, yes, should absolutely be) no less important for the Latin-Church Catholics than for "Easterners"!

I am the poor. Who's on my side? I'm homeless. I'm seriously ill. I have no income. None/few of those who preach the importance of remembering the poor seem to want to remember me. I feel like if you're poor you can't be conservative and certainly not traditional or you will just be ignored. "The poor, the poor" is little more than lip service in my experience. I've been very frustrated hearing, with this new pontificate, so many people sayng how wonderful is this renewed devotion to "the poor" when I know these are some of the same people who turn a blind eye to the poor in their midst.

Plus this same emphases on material poverty has a tendency to place the material over the spiritual and to treat suffering as just a problem to be overcome instead of something that can be spiritually meritorious.

Anyway, sorry, rant over. I do hope Boff's comments are simply untrue. He doesn't seem like a particularly reliable source.

Echoing Supertradmum - I, too, have encountered that sort of pseudo-ultramontanist attitude only in neo-con NO circles. It's, unfortunately, very prevalent.

Please let us have a little faith. Just pray for the Holy Father and wait and see before coming to any wild conclusions. I expect our new Pope will upset traditionalists and liberals in equal measures and that the secular media will have a hard time "putting him into a box," either as a "progressive" or a "reactionary." I notice that he has not once mentioned the Spirit of Vatican II but and that he has often mentioned Our Lady - in my experience any priest devoted to her is usually sound and orthodox. I suspect he is most concerned with evangelisation: given the extent to which our culture has become "dumbed down" he probably feels that people will respond to the common touch. Some of the neo-pagans, agnostics and very lapsed liberal "I was christened Church of England but never go" types I know have commented favourably on, for example, his riding the bus and paying his hotel bill himself. I suspect that way they will at least be more inclined to listen to what he says. The same people were rather put off by some of the reported sartorial choices of Benedict (red shoes etc.) and were simply less inclined to consider what he said as they judge superficially and just assumed he was a "hypocrite" talking of God and spending a fortune on such frivolous articles. Lest you think I am a raving progressive I went to the beautiful sung TLM by Father F. of the Hermeneutic of Continuity blog fame this morning, we sang God Bless the Pope at the end, (25 minutes walk or 10 mins by car) but I also went to the OF Vigil Mass last night in my own parish, (10 minutes walk, we are blessed to have churches so close here in South East London), and received Our Lord both times. I am sure He reaches out to all at the place they are and let us pray our new Pope can encourage more souls to meet Him.

To Didacus It is agreed that Pope Francis has the state of grace. But is grace irresistible? Does it not work suaviter? What is being reported are habits of behaviour which may well work against grace in a man so advanced in years. As for his talk about the Church of the Poor, whom does he have in mind by "poor"? The poor of body or spirit? All creation is poor in relation to the Creator and stands in need of Him at every moment? The materially poor are always with us says Christ. And of course it is well known who amongst the disciples of Jesus voiced most clearly concern for the poor only to forsake in the end the Lord of life. For my part I would not criticize Rorate Caeli for its coverage of the new Pope. For almost a half century many of us have suffered in the "catacombs" attending private masses said by aged retired priests in far flung places and recycling old books and catechisms to train our children and grandchildren. The question Rorate Caeli is helping us answer is whether it is time for us to emerge from the catacombs. So far it seems we have little reason to do so.

Please, dearest Excellent Nuncio Abp. Gullickson, if you are reading our comments: try contact His Beatitude Sviatoslav soon, and explain him that he should take the phone (or a plane, but very likely he will be on Tuesday in Rome for the Inauguration) and talk to Francis long enough to explain (or remind) him that being Liturgy equally Divine for both 'lungs' of the Church, her dignity shouldn't at all be overlooked, or even discarded, by the Western Church more directly "presided in the charity by the pope of Rome."

Thank You, Your Excellency.

And God bless You for all the good you do in Ukraine, in the world, and of course in the Church.

I begin to be feel quite unconfortablewith this sweeping mania of poverty and humility virtues. The reasons for material impovrishment are many, but primarily in most cases outside the traditional circles is the result of loss Faith and morals, which translates into hedonistic and materialist, beyond the means lifestyle. Couple it with frequent devorces, which decimate the financial base, it creates vast bankrupted pool of very unhappy and bitter citizens.So unless H.H. Francis acts in the catholic spirit of St. Francis of Assissi, than the marxists thorough the spirit of libo theology will begin to terorize the 'haves' under a slogan:" Share, comrade, share, immitate your Master!" His Holiness spirit of meekness and poverty has the potential to be highjacked by the enemy and result into a tyrany and nightmare like never before.

Pope Francis is the pope of "no":He doesn't wear the pontifical mozzetta because he is no different from any other bishop;He preaches from the pulpit because he is no different from a parish priest;He preaches without a miter because he is no master (teacher) of the faith, he's just a humble "bishop of rome";When we look to him from now on, we must see only a "humble" priest, not the Vicar of Christ the King of the Universe.

We'll miss pope Benedict but we must face the problem as it is. We have a different pope now, he preaches a secular style of poverty (that's my first impression and I hope being wrong). The media is molding the new Pope and yet we do not know if this Media Pope is the true pope Francis... only the time will tell.

Rorate is doing a great service to us all by keeping our feet attached to the ground. What if Pope Francis end up being this perfect liberal with a weird notion of poverty? Well we'll have to pray even more for him and for the church.

Some predictions for the first year and half:

The retirement of the papal ferula. He'll get one more humble, wood maybeCardinal Maradiaga named to a dicastery at Vatican (Clergy, maybe)Mons Pozzo named bishop of a small italian dioceseCardinal Müller created and confirmed as prefect.Mons Marini out (that's an easy guess)Cardinal Piero Marini created as a matter of justice ( :S )Also Cardinal Rino Fisichella created at the first consistoryAn ecumenical approach towards protestants instead of the Orthodox (after all the orthodox bishops wear not-so-humble vestments)Summorum Pontificum being eclipsed in south americaThe neocathecumenal liturgy approved and praised

@Supertradmum"I am beginning to think that we did not, all of us, pray for Benedict enough. Thank he was frail is true, but perhaps if we had all prayed more, we would have seen him thrive.

"I am concerned. I am also grateful, very, for this website, which allows for free discussion of all issues, while still loving and praying for our Pope."

Well said.

I would add, though, that while no pope has ever taught heresy from the throne as such, at least two have been condemned either as heretics or at least for fomenting heresy. John XXII expressed heretical opinions concerning the beatific vision, in which he was rightly opposed by the Sorbonne, which led to his eventual recantation. And who can forget Honorius I, whose favoring of Monothelitism caused him to be posthumously anathematized by the Third Council of Constantinople? In neither case did a pope attempt to impose heretical teaching upon the faithful as dogma, but the mere fact of a pope holding and communicating heretical opinions, without imposing them magisterially can and indeed has come to pass. The grace of state is not limitless.

It seems to me that if the liberals are inclined to discount the Holy Ghost entirely, then certain "conservatives" are inclined to discount the humanity of the pope. I have already seen and heard those around me, even priests, make the mistake of definitively assigning divine inspiration both the the election itself and to any and all public actions of the new pope. That attitude makes the pope out to be some sort of demigod or oracle, and adopting it is to embrace the very caricature of the "papist" that the Protestants are always railing against. I encountered a similar attitude during the conclave, which actually held that to pray for the cardinal-electors would be to sin against the Holy Ghost!

We have to love our Holy Father, even when it is difficult, but if we truly love him we will not divinize him or turn a blind eye to his faults. We have to respond appropriately, it is true, but outright denial would be to neglect our filial duty just as surely as harsh and disrespectful words would do.

So, by all means, let us all take better care to moderate our language, and redouble our prayers for the Holy Father, but let us not be silenced by false loyalty.

A comparison of Orthodox and Catholic liturgies, compiled obviously by an orthodox:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxcOv4zPoVo

The Orthodox despise the Novus Ordo, and most of all the abusive protestant-like verson of it implemented in so many ways.

An Eastern Partriarch, by the way, would never be ashamed of wearing one of the paraments proper to their office, as our Pope Francis was and is regarding the red Papal Mozzetta.

An Eastern hierarch will never dress for a formal ecclesiastical occasion except with all the proper paraments. For them, the modern Western tendency to violate the rules of protocol and ceremonial, and to despised ancient and venerated insignia of office is bizarre.

The new pope doesn't have to pull Summorum Pontificum. He can, and IMO will, introduce the hybrid soon. He can change from the inside until Tradition is no more than a pretty Novus Ordo with cultural trappings for those of us with those preferences.

Please RC, keep up the good work. This is the 60s all over again. This time we can't go down without a fight.

Here is one well publicized incident where he approved of homo "adoptions" & homo marriages:

Homosexual ceremony in a Basilica of Buenos AiresThe elegant Basilica of the Most Holy Sacrament, where perpetual adoration takes place, is one of the preferred churches in Buenos Aires, Argentina, for marriages and ceremonies of high society. On August 25, 2012, the church was the stage for a sequence of scandals.

Homosexual Roberto Carlos Trinidad submitted himself to surgeries to change his sex and became "Florencia" Trinidad, above at left in the white dress. He/she has lived with another man, Pablo Goycochea, for more than a decade. "Florencia" is a TV star in several series on Telefe - Channel 11 on Buenos Aires television. Some time ago, the homosexual couple adopted (purchased) two children born on the same day from a clinic that does artificial insemination in San Diego, California.

On the first birthday of the "twins," "Florencia" and her partner decided to have the children baptized. The Catholic religious authorities found nothing better to do than give permission for the ceremony to be performed at the Basilica of the Most Holy Sacrament. This is not to say that those children should not be baptized; the point at hand is that these baptisms should never have been publicly celebrated as an exaltation of homosexuality, as indeed it was.

Thus, after reportedly giving Communion to the homosexual couple, Fr. Jorge Garcia Cuerva, above center, officiated with all pomp and circumstance at the ceremony of Baptism. How can one not see in this broadly publicized event a blatant support of the Catholic Church for homosexual "marriage" and change-of-sexes surgeries?

http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A487-BsAs-Homo.htm

I personally do not believe in baptizing infants unless parents vow to raise the children Catholic - if parents are Muslims, Jews or Hindus, would not be call for blanket baptism - same w/those who are living lives of fornication or sodomy. These will not raise children as Christians; ergo sacrament should NOT be made a sacrilege.

It is sad to say, but what we see now in Rome is something we are very used to in South America. I live in South Brazil and what I see is that N.O. catholics are extremely happy because of this election. Why? Because Card. Bergoglio had the same ideas and manners of our own bishops. We know that very well. I don't know how to express myself correctly, but it is as if the new direction had a very familiar smell. He is like our own bishops! Maybe it is not so easy for outsiders to grasp it...

Francis in Ma said, "Not to us whom have known about what this guy has stood for for years! I know that I sound like a broken record but Bergoglio is about the worst choice for pope we traditionalists could have got, except for Christoph Schonborn and a handful of other devout modernists and liberals. Lord help us!"

Yes. Lord help us! As I have said before (my broken record) the Conclave knew exactly what it was doing. We have a clear idea how the Conclave works. Who cares about all the secrecy of it? No one cares about those details, but we all know about the balloting procedures and how they went about getting the numbers they wanted to force the showdown between Bergoglio and whomever the runner-up was. As voting continues the other contenders loose out and fall farther down the odds until the Conclave has their man. It's obvious how this worked out. They did not want any surprises like they got with Benedict and they sure as mud made certain the deck was stacked in their favor.

My general impression of what the pope has said and done so far has been positive. The EWTN interview was interesting and revealed nothing to get Boff so excited.From the commentary, I can only assume that:

1) Francis is like some kind of South American chameleon (no disrespect intended), or

2) People are seeing either what they want to see or fear to find.

I am hopeful that the Holy Fathers actions and pronouncements will clarify our impressions, in good time.

The bottom line: we were not worthy of Benedict's pontificate. It was a sign of God's mercy to place him there. We did not do our part well enough. We ARE NOT doing are part well enough.

A humbling thought. When are traditionalists going to start being missionaries? Are we promoting Christ to others? Are we introducing people to the Church and to the reverence of the traditional mass? When was the last time we invited friends or neighbors to mass? Are we driving others away from the Church, by overly pessimistic attitudes? Do other Catholics see the Love and Truth of Christ in us?

If traditionalists want to preserve the old mass, we may have to be more bold in bringing people to Christ.

Over the past 20 years, liberation theology in Brazil has become a dying body. To tell the truth, there has never been liberation theologians .. but political ideologists and as such they are as opportunistic as any politicians. They are creating facts through the media sympathetic to them, trying to link the Holy Father’s image with their so-called liberation theology. The liberation ideologists, most of them old men now, are doing their best in order not to miss the last train. They know they don’t have much time ahead, unless they associate their "theology" with the new pontificate. By the way, even Boff knows that the future of the liberation theology is uncertain... so much that he has become one of the major figures of a weird “theology of the Nature” whatever it means...

Everyone tries to claim the Pope as his own. I'm been in touch with circles that have tried to claim each Pope for a hundred years as sympathetic to their causes. Everything tries to claim the Pope for his own cause.

Everyone but the Traditionalists. They go out of their way to demonstrate that the Pope stands opposite them.

In 2005 Benedict XVI gave a lecture on Mohammedanism at Regensburg University, at which he had taught for a time early in his priestly career. While quoting from an obscure medieval text, declared that the Prophet Mohammed, founder of the Islamic faith, was "evil and inhuman", enraging the Muslim population and causing attacks on churches throughout the world before an apology was issued.

Reacting within days to the statements, speaking through a spokesman to Newsweek Argentina, then Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio declared his "unhappiness" with the statements, made at the University of Regensburg in Germany, and encouraged many of his subordinates with the Church to do the same.

"Pope Benedict's statement don't reflect my own opinions", the then Archbishop of Buenos Aires declared. "These statements will serve to destroy in 20 seconds the careful construction of a relationship with Islam that Pope John Paul II built over the last twenty years".

The Vatican reacted quickly, removing one subordinate, Joaquín Piña the Archbishop of Puerto Iguazú from his post within four days of his making similar statements to the Argentine national media, sending a clear statement to Cardinal Bergoglio that he would be next should he choose to persist.

Reacting to the threats from Rome, Cardinal Bergoglio cancelled his plans to fly to Rome, choosing to boycott the second synod that Pope Benedict had called during his tenure as pontiff.

"The only thing that didn't happen to Bergoglio was being removed from his post", wrote investigative journalist Horacio Verbitsky in his column in left-wing daily newspaper Página/24. "The Vatican was very quick to react,"

I continue to read of The Benedictine Arrangement (which includes Mass facing the folks - a Martin Luther invention) and as it is the case I am a soi disant traditionalist, I would like to be made aware of just when it was the the Benedictine Arrangement (a purely personal choice) became the standard of judging any other Mass?

During the reign of Bishop Emeritus Benedict XVI a very discernible and dangerous attitude formed in the minds of many soi disant trads - that his personal choices about how to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass became to be considered authoritative.

Well, the plain and simple truth was that Bishop Emeritus Benedicat XVI celebrated the Lil' Licit Liturgy according to his own personal tastes and so there is absolutely no basis for making his personal choices a standard of judgment for Pope Francis; that is, the Mass has become the playground of personal preferences and so it would be a huge mistake to allow our own selves to fall into the trap of thinking of the Lil' Licit Liturgy (no matter how it is celebrated) as acceptaable in Catholic Tradition just as long as it is offered the way Bishop Emeritus Benedict XVI offered it.

part of the then confusion was the wrong "evil and inhuman" English translation. The Pope spoke German, and said "bad and inhumane".

Generally,

the Spiegel and its attitude to the Church is well-known enough. So is Mr Boff's. It is legitimate to critizise the Pope, contrary to some assumptions (I have withhold from doing so, even interiorly, for my own emotional health I guess); but I can say that *this* fills me with no worry *at all*.

I Am Not Spartacus, Luther shouldn't be used as proof of a practice being bad per se. In Pope Leo X's Exsurge Domine article 33, Luther's idea that burning heretics is against the Holy Spirit was condemned by Pope Leo X. Who was right? Luther was unless you think Veritatis Splendor is heretical because in section 80, it condemns "coercion of the spirit" as intrinsic evil...in other words, it agrees with Luther...as does Vat.II.Read Galatians 5:20..."parties" are considered as fleshy as fornications. If you stir up division on secondary matters, you may face hell forever. The Jews faulted Christ's disciples for not washing their hands up to the wrist each time they ate...they saw the secondary as primary. God killed 1 million of them and of their 3rd and 4th generation in Jerusalem in 70 AD. Be very careful sir.

One: Boff is telling the truth and Pope Francis is a great deceiver. If so we shall find that out soon enough. Or,

Two: Boff is merely trying to foment dissent among the faithful and co-opt the papacy. This seems far more probable to me, given the Holy Father's clearly documented past pronouncements on the matter. If this scenario is true then this blog is playing right into Boff's hands.

Of course, No. 33 is the very one article that is wrongly condemned in Exsurge Domine. (Yet note that the summary condemnation as "either heretical or erroneous or scandalous or ... or... or..." leaves it quite open, even without claiming magisterial fallibility, to treat a condemned sentence as in itself defensible. Because it means that it has not in itself been called heretical or erroneous.) The rest are and remain a beautiful and truthful expression of Catholicism.

Also to all probability, the intent with which Luther said No. 33, was rightly condemned. We must not burn the heretic because we have to, for some reasons, tolerate (Latin word for "endure") him while being quite sure that our position is the right one. This was not Luther's idea. Though I feel unable to describe or guess what Luther's actual idea was. He certainly believed himself to be absolutely right (which makes him quite more logical than any "everyone may find meaning for himself" modernisms). Yet apparently he also did feel the heretic to be somewhat an oracle of truth.

Of course, Luther said some right things. And many more defensible things. I draw a distinction, because when Luther says something, I often feel it defensible, but "only so by an inch", or "with unhealthy focus", or the kind.

To begin with, he certainly was a killjoy. And I still believe, and substantiatedly believe, that Our Lord was not.

What is heretical is to think of the Pope pronouncing a heresy from the Chair of St. Peter.

To call heretical what is not so is, at best, a bit uncharitable.

There have been Popes who have failed to condemn heresy and had the effect of appearing to favor it, and one was condemned for doing so by an Ecumenical Council (due, it is true, a bit to the superioritism of the Greeks).

A thought occurred to me today which really creeped me out, totally. While thinking of the Holy Father's Coronation tomorrow, I suddenly recalled a movie I had seen on video as a kid. It was called, "The Shoes Of The Fisherman" starring Anthony Quinn. I won't tell the whole story but the gist of it is a Cardinal whom unexpectedly and quite shockingly was chosen to be Pope. His Ecclesial pedigree was less than desirable and so was where he came from but there he was on the Throne of Peter.

This Papal character was all about being folksy, had strange ideas about the Faith and... had this attitude about the poor. I just about up-chucked when the similarities of that movie and the present Holy Father came to mind. Watch it, folks, and decide for yourselves. C R E E P Y.

Two: Boff is merely trying to foment dissent among the faithful and co-opt the papacy. This seems far more probable to me, given the Holy Father's clearly documented past pronouncements on the matter.

While I continue (as we all do, I think), to have concerns about this pontificate, I think that your second hypothesis is the more likely. Boff has been in the wilderness for decades, and it would be natural for him to latch on to any possible vindication.

Whatever else is true, Pope Francis suffered real personal loss for his opposition to liberation theology among the Jesuits - at a time when other Jesuit provincials and even the Superior General of the order had no compunction about favoring it.

Okay, everyone. Francis' reign is official now. I think we need to brace ourselves. This article from EWTN sounds like we got our own Obama.

18-March-2013 -- Pope Francis will shake up more than Vatican schedules All the Vatican officials will continue in their positions "until otherwise provided" while Pope Francis takes time for "reflection, prayer and dialogue before making any definitive appointments," but one can expect changes to happen.

Usually, when a new Pope begins his ministry, he confirms all the heads of the congregations and pontifical councils, who lost their posts at the beginning of the sede vacante period. He also reconfirms the five-year terms for the secretaries of the Vatican departments - who took over the management of the offices while there was no Pope.

When he issued the normal confirmation on March 16, Pope Francis only offered a two-sentence statement, and nothing is mentioned about the Vatican Secretariat of State, the second most powerful congregation.

"You should expect a lot of changes under Pope Francis' pontificate," said Alberto Barlocci, a reporter based in Buenos Aires and the director of the magazine Ciudad Nueva.

"With his first gestures, he wants to make a break with the past and signal that the Church is something different from frills and (its) image.[Scary, meaning...?]

"But if you think that he would not govern the Curia, you are wrong. He knows very well what the problems are, and he has probably already thought of how to handle them," Barlocci told EWTN News on March 15.

One of the first dossiers Pope Francis will receive contains the findings from the investigation conducted by three cardinals into the Vatileaks scandal.

In fact, when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Jorge Mario Bergoglio became acquainted with how maneuvering at the Vatican could affect his ability to carry out his ministry.

An Argentinian prelate who spoke on the condition of anonymity told EWTN News March 16 that Cardinal Bergoglio was "named as auxiliary and then archbishop of Buenos Aires to save the diocese from the disarray left by his predecessor Guarracino."

But, he adds, "when new bishops were appointed in Argentina, he always found out that none of the indications he gave had been accepted." The process for selecting bishops typically involves the metropolitan archbishop offering his suggestions of who the Pope should appoint as a bishop for vacant dioceses. However, in the case of Cardinal Bergoglio, his input was somehow being disregarded at the Congregation for Clergy.

The papal nuncio to Argentina responded by submitting the same top three suggestions for new bishops to the Congregation for Clergy, so "the new bishops were in agreement with Bergoglio."

This maneuvering at the Congregation for Clergy was guided by Cardinal Angelo Sodano, who was Vatican secretary of state at the time and had clout in Latin America because of the years he served there as a papal nuncio. And his influence is still felt in the region because of the network of diplomats he helped establish their careers.

However, Pope Francis seems to be very aware of these problems.

In fact, nothing of the Vatileaks dossier will likely surprise him. Pope Francis will take his time to understand how to "reform" the Curia.

"Cardinals told me," he joked at a March 16 meeting with journalists, "that I had to take the name of Hadrian VII, since there was the need of a Curia reform, and Hadrian VI was a great reformer."

The first move of the new Pope will presumably be to appoint a new Vatican Secretary of State.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone is 78 and he beyond the age of retirement. The race to take over his post seems to be between the two Italians: Giuseppe Bertello - now in charge of the Vatican City State's administration - and Fernando Filoni - the prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.

Perhaps we would do well to remember that 67 of the cardinal electors were appointees of Pope Emeritus Benedict, who is a thorough and deliberate man - and a man of great holiness and wisdom. With the selection criteria increased to 2/3 +1, Francis could not have won without strong support from Benedict's appointees. Given that there were many quality candidates to choose from, the fact that they chose Francis should speak for itself.

I have also heard it said that when Bergoglio was essentially banished by the Jesuits because of his orthodoxy, it was a certain Cardinal Ratzinger who eventually heard of this and recommended Bergoglio to John Paul II for consecration as bishop. This was not the only time Cardinal Ratzinger did this for priests who had suffered persecution as a result of their faithfulness to the magisterium.

And so not only did Benedict have confidence in him but so did his appointees. Does this not speak well of Francis?

It also appears that the Curia is in desperate need of both reform and cleansing - there are rumors of some rather vile behavior and corruption in recent years by some members of the Curia. I suspect the results of the Vatileaks study (known only to God and a few men) will be a painful burden for the new pope to bear. Yet, Francis will probably do a good job of cleaning house - and some believe that one of the reasons Benedict chose to resign was because his failing health and lack of vitality meant that he could no longer effectively clean house himself. There do appear to be many at the Curia who absolutely need to be relieved of their posts - Francis might be just the man to do it. He has shown saintly humility in the past and by this, I mean that he has the guts and the courage to make waves and do what needs to be done even if it tramples on a few egos.

Let us consider what we have seen of Francis thus far:

When we saw Francis descending from the pope-mobile to embrace the crippled man (before his Inauguration Mass), can we not say that we have a pope like Jesus? When we see photos of him kissing the feet of AIDS patients and drug addicts, do we not see the holiness of the Apostles? When he speaks truly to power in such a way to alienate himself from the trend-following political elites of his home country, do we not perceive the courage and humility of the saints?

Was not the Inauguration Mass an inspiring example of the ordinary rite of the Mass? Were not the Gregorian chant and polyphany of the world-famous Vatican schola beautiful and inspiring?

Does he not set the example by his devotion to Our Lady? Does she ever lead us astray?

Was it not a hopeful sign of his devotion to St. Joseph that Francis chose the readings for the Solemnity of St. Joseph for the Inauguration Mass? Did not St. Joseph protect Our Lord and Our Lady? Does he not watch over the Church?

With the example of and intercession of St. Francis of Assisi, are we not in good company?

Do we not suppose that Saint Peter and Saint Paul are at this very moment at work in God's Church?

God gave us John Paul II to show us hope. He gave us Benedict to increase our faith. Now it seems God has chosen Francis who will help us better to recognize and to practice love. Scripture tells us that of these three, love is the greatest - love endures forever.

Rather than telling God what we think we need for ourselves, instead let us prayerfully pause for a moment to consider what He is telling us we need and what He has in store for us. Let us consider that God had great things to achieve through his servants John Paul and Benedict and now that God has chosen to achieve great things through his new pope, Francis. Shall we reject this or embrace it? Shall we accept it grudgingly with white knuckles or joyfully?

Let us be of good cheer: God has not abandoned us! He promised that He would be with us until the end of time. Jesus assures us that the gates of Hell shall NEVER prevail against his Church.

Shall we not see with eyes of faith that Heaven rejoiced today at God provisioning yet again for his beloved Church, as He has always done? Shall we not suppose that the angels and saints of Heaven rejoiced - if only we could hear them? Can we not suppose that the Archangels dispatched the Heavenly Host to escort the new pontiff in procession?

As Jesus said to the Apostles on the water during the storm: Why are you afraid? Have you no faith?

Therefore, consider (for a moment) the possibility that Francis is a man of deep holiness and that he is precisely the man whom God wishes to be our pope for the coming years and that instead of suffering, great joy will ensue - but let us remember that we must receive that joy from the Lord as with the mind and heart of a pure child. Jesus told us that we must be as children to enter the Kingdom - after all, only a child can receive a gift with gratitude and freedom, unencumbered like the adult intellect which is prideful and sinfully wounded all the more.

Let us not be like the Sadducees who reject what Jesus offers them. And let us remember what Jesus said of them, that he has no part with them!

Let us not be like King Saul who presumed to know better than God what was best for his people - and whose greatest sin was to appropriate for himself the role which God had given to his priest.

Let us be like King David, whose heart was like God's; not like Solomon whose pride, weakness and lack of faith and trust in the Lord tore the kingdom asunder.

Let us not unwittingly succumb to the devil who delights in seeing pessimism and division. Let us not drink his poison!

I loved and admired Pope Benedict will my whole heart for every moment of his papacy. I drew great nourishment and consolation daily from the mere knowledge that he was at the helm. It broke my heart when he announced his resignation - not because I feared what would come next, but simply because I have such deep love and respect for him and I was not ready to let him go. If Benedict could see how poorly a few of us are supporting his successor, I think it would grieve him greatly. I think his response would be one of rebuke and admonishment. Discord is not the fruit of the Holy Spirit and loyalty to the Successor of Saint Peter is the ONLY thing which distinguishes us from all other religious denominations and persuasions ever known to man.

I do not think he can do it even if he is that liberal. Let him promulgate a document approving homosexual marriage - let him watch every true Catholic in the world roar for his deposition.

That is the only good thing about liberals. They talk - they write. Lecture and publish. They do not do.

And this jester Boff is wrong. The bishop of Rome cannot do whatever he wants. That pressure from the Vatican - Bergoglio now lives in it. He is just a pre-aged Wojtyła. The last bishop of Rome this conclave is going to be responsible for.

Not at My Feet will they fall. It will not be My Feet they kiss, but those of My servants, My followers, My sinners

Friday, March 29th, 2013 @ 07:00 pm My dearly beloved daughter when Judas Iscariot betrayed Me, he held My Head and kissed me on the cheek. When those who lead My Church say they love Me, and then betray Me, you will see, clearly, their kiss of betrayal.

Not at My Feet will they fall. It will not be My Feet they kiss, but those of My servants, My followers , My sinners.

Showing concern for the needs of fellow human beings is admirable. But when you promote the physical well-being of the needs of man over their spiritual needs it is not I, Jesus Christ, you follow.

Humanism is not Christianity. To be Christian means surrendering all to Me, abandoning yourself in full humility at My Feet. It means allowing Me to guide you. It means obedience to My Laws and doing all that you can to show the example of My Love for you all. Today I was betrayed.

Not for long can, nor will, you be deceived for once the House of God is attacked from within nothing but disorder can follow. You must pick up your Cross and follow Me for soon you will be blindfolded and you will stumble and fall in the dark.